Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38072 of 2018 Applicant :- Bhuvnesh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
Heard Sri Suresh Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash entire proceedings of Case No. 2438 of 2011 (State Vs. Bhuvnesh Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 77 of 2010, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Inchauli, District- Meerut, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-IX, Meerut.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits opposite party no.2 herein lodged an FIR on 6.2.2010 and on the basis of which Case Crime No.77 of 2010, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Inchauli, District- Meerut was registered. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet dated 16.3.2010 was submitted. He also submits that the respondent no.2 is residing at Aligarh and applicants are also residing at Aligarh and the daughter of the respondent no.2 is running a beauty parlour in District Meerut. He further submits that the respondent no.2 has filed false case to harass the applicants.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case on the ground that the applicants failed to appear before the trial court and bailable warrants were issued against them on 20.10.2010 and the applicants are intentionally not appearing and the trail is being delayed.
I have carefully considered the submissions made by learned counsel for applicants as well as learned AGA for the State. I have also gone through the material available on record.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. In my view, the submissions made by learned counsel for applicants relate to disputed questions of facts and the same can not be adjudicated upon at this stage in the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants are matter of defence.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case titled as 'R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab' A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 'State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal' 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 'Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another', 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 (Para-10) has observed that at the stage of congnizance, only prima-facie case has to be seen.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case and the same is declined.
However, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in another case titled as 'Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh versus State of U.P. and others' 2009 Sup AIR (SC) 2178 and judgment of this Court titled as 'Amarawati and another versus State of U.P.' 2004 (57) ALR 290, the applicants are directed to appear and surrender before the learned court concerned within 30 days from today in the aforementioned case and move an appropriate application for bail. The learned trial court will consider the said application in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. No coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case for a period of 30 days or till the application filed by the applicants is decided, whichever is earlier. In case, the applicants fail to appear before the court concerned within the aforesaid period, the interim order shall stand vacated.
With the aforesaid observations, the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.
(V.P. Vaish, J.) Order Date :- 27.11.2018 Vivek Kr.